It's not hard to find problems with the current state of NCAA sports, particularly at big-time schools that have been called football factories or basketball academies.

"Student-athletes" usually devote more than 40 hours per week to games, practice and travel. Collectively, their colleges rake in billions each year. Some individual schools have higher revenues than many professional teams. Yet the players don't get a nickel of this money while they are in school, and only about 1 percent of them go on to pro careers in their sports.

Unions have a place in the private sector. They fight for better wages and benefits for their members, who are employees of some company. That model doesn't fit student-athletes.

A change like this could shut down programs at smaller colleges that can't afford to pay much, if anything, to their student-athletes. If athletes get bargaining rights, they also might have to pay taxes on their "free" college educations, a cost that few can afford now, and a sum that might swallow up any salary.

The NCAA needs to figure out a way to set aside some revenues for athletes after they graduate. That would maintain their amateur status, yet provide them some of the money they deserve.

Again, the present system is hardly perfect. But unionizing college athletes could end college sports as we know it and provide far fewer opportunities for thousands of young men and women.